[blml] About restoring equity

[gesta at tiscali.co.uk]

Grattan Endicott<gesta at tiscali.co.uk
[following address discontinued:
grandeval at vejez.fsnet.co.uk]
********************************
"Small talk dies in agonies."
                     ~ Shelley
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Alain Gottcheiner" <agot at ulb.ac.be>
To: "Bridge Laws Mailing List" <blml at amsterdamned.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 11:43 AM
Subject: Re: [blml] About restoring equity


There is, however, that last problem : most "second revoke"
cases can lead to invoking L72B1, to such a point that the
"no penalty" in L64B2 is almost void if one is to take L72B1
literally. And, precisely, L72B1 is among the most subjective
and least intersubjective.

+=+ In such a context I wonder how you regard the revised
wording in 2007 Law 23 ?   There was some agonising over
the precise terms in which this law should be set (but not at
all in respect of the principle).
       The other aspect of 2007 law relating to restoration of
equity is the definition of the purpose of score adjustment
(see Law 12B1).
                                                       ~ Grattan ~   +=+